Login

russian armor

Player Card Worth and Community

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (7)down
9 Mar 2015, 18:26 PM
#101
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15

9 Mar 2015, 18:29 PM
#102
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

I mean, it's the only account on Steam with his name, it doesn't have any name changes other than that name for 5 years, and it just happens to have 700 hours in CoH2. You can draw your own conclusions.
9 Mar 2015, 18:31 PM
#103
avatar of TomOfAction
Benefactor 341

Posts: 84

Does this actually mean buggger all?

I have been playing since pretty much release and had to deal with every damn meta that has come out. so my rank has had high and low times. Some games I play against players who are far far blow my skill level and then the next game I have to struggle the whole game through-

but the in game chat differs, against the less skillful its all GLHF. Its mostly on the tougher games where dialogue breaks down, teammates start tweaking and blaming each other for being noobs, the other team is calling me a arty noob for using demo charges... like wtf?(whose the noob?)

Lately in the steam forums it becoming more common place for people to post player cards as a means to discredit arguments, pretty much naming and shaming them with rank scores.

"you don't know what your taking about look at your rank"

I think this has to stop.

It feels like our remaining player base has split into 2 types, the elitists who think they know everything cause they over-play and the "noobs" who need to L2P as put by the ones who think they know best.

I think the "Elitist" players attitude with this game pisses me off more than a bad loss.

Which bring me to a suggestion. instead of just a player vs player mode, a casual and competitive mode would be good. weed out the ones who just want to have fun and put the elites against people of equal skill and competitive mind set.

I think that would be a good start cheering people up





I haven't read the rest of the community's feedback yet (don't know if I will, I sense a flame-war in the midst), however, I can say that since this is a video game with a multiplayer component tied to it, there is only naturally going to be a wide-diversity of how players present themselves and their attitudes. Of course there are going to be "good" and "bad" sports, however, it is impossible to create a generalization (aka: stereotyping) of how a particular pool of players behave, based off of the actions of a select handful of individuals. I highly enjoy competitive games that have strategy as the main concept of utilization, and I only naturally get upset if I lose a really close match or something (whether it is due to balance or my need to improve my current skill-set) goes awry. HOWEVER, I personally feel like my attitude cannot be based off a single match, in the heat of the moment, and when I am feeling particularly passionate about what I'm doing. I respond to events based off of various components, and it alters from situation to situation. I personally believe it isn't necessary to flame/be a "Negative Nancy" unless I am deliberately attacked/provoked by a peer. And in regards to playercard statistics, I (like many others) enjoy this game and feel a sense of accomplishment when I am able to acquire a higher-level of ELO Ranking than other players, based off of my performance in game, but I don't think that it gives me the rationale/justification to put other people down. I think that this quote from Stephen Hawking in regards to the relevance of IQ points can be equally applied to the playercard debate: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."

9 Mar 2015, 18:38 PM
#104
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

It's not really comparable to IQ because IQ isn't a credential. Ladder ranking, when read properly and when its shortcomings are accounted for, is the best credential you have after tournament results when it comes to competitive multiplayer games.

It's more like giving Stephen Hawking's opinion on matters of science more weight than mine, for instance, because Stephen Hawking has a wide variety of scientific accomplishments and I have none. We could both say the exact same thing, but people are going to listen closer when he's the one saying it.
9 Mar 2015, 18:55 PM
#105
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

I mean, it's the only account on Steam with his name, it doesn't have any name changes other than that name for 5 years, and it just happens to have 700 hours in CoH2. You can draw your own conclusions.


It has some of my AT's on it, but Iv changed my name a lot in the past 5 years.
9 Mar 2015, 18:58 PM
#106
avatar of Purlictor

Posts: 393


http://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/viewBoard/0/steamid/76561198026003886


Oh dear. That's most unfortunate. If only coh2.org had a block button.
9 Mar 2015, 18:59 PM
#107
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484



It has some of my AT's on it, but Iv changed my name a lot in the past 5 years.


It will be nice for you to play more Allies and get to top 100 before posting "Axis back foot" scenario to justify balance.
9 Mar 2015, 19:00 PM
#108
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15

What gets me is he says controversial stuff like Smoke is useless at high level,and probably other equally dumb things when he clearly doesnt play at a high level,at all. What do you know??? I mean seriously!!

His only redeeming stat is top 50 3v3 AT as AXIS,Of course. (thats Honestly not really all that deserved either only 20 something games,barely out of placement matches. they really need to fix that.)

and you expect me to standby and listen to the outrageuous stuff he says.


if you're gonna pollute a BALANCE forum with a thousand BS posts at least be able to back it up. Otherwise stay out of balance discussions,and you wont get people upset at you for not knowing what you're talking about.
9 Mar 2015, 19:09 PM
#109
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

It will be nice for you to play more Allies and get to top 100 before posting "Axis back foot" scenario to justify balance.


Playing Allied randoms, that's a nice joke

What gets me is he says controversial stuff like Smoke is useless at high level,and probably other equally dumb things when he clearly doesnt play at a high level,at all. What do you know??? I mean seriously!!

His only redeeming stat is top 50 3v3 AT as AXIS,Of course. (thats Honestly not really all that deserved either only 20 something games,barely out of placement matches. they really need to fix that.)

and you expect me to standby and listen to the outrageuous stuff he says.


if you're gonna pollute a BALANCE forum with a thousand BS posts at least be able to back it up. Otherwise stay out of balance discussions,and you wont get people upset at you for not knowing what you're talking about.


Wow does attack ground suddenly stop working if your playing in a match against opponents below a certain rank???

You have done nothing but state that "But that's not true" in response to me pointing out a numerous amount of ways you can negate the use of smoke with good micro, way's Iv seen done by players across a wide spectrum.

But I look forward to the next 10 posts in this thread of people getting angry at me with out any actual substance to their posts at all~
9 Mar 2015, 19:10 PM
#110
avatar of Death's Head

Posts: 440

Gettin' ugly up in here...
9 Mar 2015, 19:12 PM
#111
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

Gettin' ugly up in here...


It was always going to end this way, people can't handle disagreement on these forums with out instantly resorting to harassment. There are certain members on these forums whose a majority of their posts are just spouting hateful crap at me.
9 Mar 2015, 19:16 PM
#112
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15



It was always going to end this way, people can't handle disagreement on these forums with out instantly resorting to harassment. There are certain members on these forums whose a majority of their posts are just spouting hateful crap at me.



Bcuz ur a liar and ur opinion is fraud and void inb4lock
9 Mar 2015, 19:20 PM
#113
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484



Playing Allied randoms, that's a nice joke


Sums up the reason why we have so many threads about OKW nerfs. I can play random as Axis (OKW mostly) and win almost all of my games, trying this with Allies is insane. I never said play randoms, why don't you take your AT team and try to get be a bit competitive and not play Ez-mode Germans all the time.
9 Mar 2015, 19:21 PM
#114
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1




Bcuz ur a liar and ur opinion is fraud and void inb4lock


You have never actually offered on argument other than "Because I say so it's true". How am I a liar? Does attack ground not exist? Does smoke not block LOS? Can mines not be detted with other explosives?

9 Mar 2015, 19:22 PM
#115
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



Sums up the reason why we have so many threads about OKW nerfs. I can play random as Axis (OKW mostly) and win almost all of my games, trying this with Allies is insane. I never said play randoms, why don't you take your AT team and try to get be a bit competitive and not play Ez-mode Germans all the time.


We have gone over this, but Allies in AT's are just as easy as Axis in AT's.
9 Mar 2015, 19:29 PM
#116
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2


...


do you really think people target you only because of your playercard?

you might be THE perfect example of why playercard does matter. Luckily for you, there are many other people with bad playercards who talks sense.

9 Mar 2015, 19:33 PM
#117
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15



You have never actually offered on argument other than "Because I say so it's true". How am I a liar? Does attack ground not exist? Does smoke not block LOS? Can mines not be detted with other explosives?




My argument is I actually pull off the scenarios that I claim when it comes to balance discussions, at a high level.

Your arguments are dreams,and visions.

Quentin says(said) alot of stupid stuff but at least he's good. You're honestly not that great(i wont say bad) and you say silly things. Then wonder why people go "Wtf are you talking about man? show Playercard plz?"
9 Mar 2015, 19:35 PM
#118
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



do you really think people target you only because of your playercard?

you might be THE perfect example of why playercard does matter. Luckily for you, there are many other people with bad playercards who talks sense.



Considering 90% of people don't actually bother to make some sort of argument or propose any sort of change then yes.

I agree with a majority of people on these forums about most things like Obers being BS, OKW and USF having to fast teching, the issues with USF being 1 trick wonders.

But because I don't think this can be fixed by taking every well preforming unit like the Panther and pile driving it into the ground I'm suddenly a ~fanboy~.

This argument with Cookies is the perfect example, he has said nothing but "Well your a big fat lying butt" when Iv tried to point out to him that smoke gets less (read: not useless) useful when facing players with good micro.

The thing with mines is hilarious, since he said demo's count as mines.
9 Mar 2015, 19:38 PM
#119
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1




My argument is I actually pull off the scenarios that I claim when it comes to balance discussions, at a high level.

Your arguments are dreams,and visions.

Quentin says(said) alot of stupid stuff but at least he's good. You're honestly not that great(i wont say bad) and you say silly things. Then wonder why people go "Wtf are you talking about man? show Playercard plz?"


Well considering your only evidence that your right is a number at the bottom of your post, instead of say, an understanding of how game mechanics actually work I'm going to just go with your pissed that someone disagrees with you about something.

How is in anyway silly to say that mines aren't all that useful against a player who knows to check for them? That is a logical statement, good players always check for mines.
9 Mar 2015, 19:39 PM
#120
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976

Ladder rank mean nothing except in 1vs1. In automatch, you never know with who you're matched. And if you prefer having fun in 4vs4 with friends who are not yet «champions» your playcard will be a lot less stellar. But it also that don't mean someone don't know the game...

And you don't need you look at someone playcard to know it's level of understanding, often just reading a few lines say it all...

;)
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

585 users are online: 585 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM